(June 19, 2012 at 1:01 am)gomtuu77 Wrote: Let me see if I can put it differently. If one is wondering where the stories of Jesus came from, it is probably distinctly and obviously unhelpful to assume his nonexistence, a position not held by the vast majority of religous and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years, including today. Rather, I would simply check out all primary source material that is available and attempt to answer the question; what best accounts for the existence of these stories or myths? The non-existence of such a person wouldn't be the first answer to the question that popped out at me. One might as well assume that the 60 million deaths between 1938 to 1945 had nothing to do with war and yet still attempt to answer the question..."what caused the 60 million deaths between 1938 and 1945?". Do you not see the problem?
I think it's fair to say that most scholars were and are willing to assume the existence of a "historical Jesus" whatever that's supposed to mean (I maintain that Jesus without the super powers, miracles and other aspects of divinity would be so different that the "real story" would bear no resemblance to the one we're familiar with). Christianity still swings a heavy bat and while they can't torture or burn heretics at the stake, they can still ruin your career and get you fired.
I have, btw, an open invitation to debate the "historical Jesus" with any taker, Christian or otherwise, provided we can agree on the bare minimum of what qualifies as "The Historical Jesus".
Back to the topic, let's assume that scholars are genuine in their assertions that some mortal teacher must have existed behind Christian mythology. It still would do nothing to prove that a Jesus must have existed. This is a logical fallacy called "appeal to authority". Even experts have to prove what they believe and why. "Shut up, I say so" isn't an acceptable argument even from experts.
Your comparison to the holocaust, implicitly linking Jesus skeptics to holocaust deniers, is a fallacious ad hominem. It's an attempt to poison the well, nothing more.
Your assertion that there must have been some mortal teacher behind Christian mythology is called an argument from ignorance.
I invite you to review the debate thread I have linked.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist